The Culture of Success

This is going to be an article riddled with violations of 'political correctness'. As a result, we have an opportunity to think about a subject in an informative and unique context, two characteristics that 'political correctness' preclude.

The first question we can ask is why Australia and New Zealand are wealthy, while Haiti and Liberia are among the world's poorest. All four are countries that are inhabited and governed by people who have been there for under 200 years. Let me also provide the disclaimer that the reason is not because of the skin color of the inhabitants of those countries.

So why is the outcome of the two populations of African origin so incredibly worse than that of the two populations of Anglo-Saxon Protestant origin?

One word : Culture.

Cultures of specific ethnic groups are formed over the the course of centuries, not just decades. The early inhabitants of Australia and New Zealand (and Canada) were already conditioned with centuries of Anglo-Saxon Protestant culture, wherein the necessary ingredients of democracy, industry, and rule of law were already internalized. Hence, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, despite being on separate paths for two centuries, still have produced remarkably similar outcomes. At the other end of the scale, Haiti gained independence in 1804, yet is still the only country in the Western Hemisphere with African levels of poverty - even Mexico is a paradise by comparison. Liberia is a country created for freed US slaves to return to in order to create a new home in Africa, with a constitution modeled off of the US constitution, and with ongoing benefits of US financial aid and mentorship. Nonetheless, Liberia is no more advanced that the traditional African countries that surround it. This leads to a conclusion that most sub-Saharan African cultures, over the course of centuries, never developed the intellectual or philosophical foundations of science, legal institutions, or productivity. Being separated from African society for two centuries is not sufficient to undo the millennia of anti-advancement conditioning that generations of people received in Africa, and hence the outcomes are still inevitably similar.

Ponder that for a moment, and then let us return to the United States.

Today, African-Americans in the United States have lower incomes than whites, even decades after the Civil Rights Movement and 140 years after the last slaves were freed. In 2006, average annual household income for whites is $49,000 while for African-Americans is just $30,134. It is true that institutionalized discrimination, segregation, and the forced separation of families are all sad chapters in the history of how African Americans were treated in the US. At the same time, they have received benefits like affirmative action, special scholarships, and other programs to help undo the damage previously inflicted upon them, and do have dominance in lucrative fields such as sports and music. The examples of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Haiti, Liberia, and Africa in general make it illogical to view the US as a microcosm, and the logical conclusion becomes that African-Americans still are within the partial clutches of African cultural traits that make economic advancement difficult. Centuries of life in the US have undone a portion of this, resulting in African Americans being far wealthier than blacks anywhere else in the world. However, it will still take a long time for them to fully gain economic parity with whites, in the US or in any other country in the world. The accelerating rate of change may help compress what would have previously taken centuries into mere decades, but the sheer enormity of the process of cultural transformation should not be underestimated.

Again, this has nothing to do with skin color, and there will be many individual exceptions to the majority. A black infant adopted by a Jewish or WASP family will achieve the same success as others of those groups, provided his childhood interactions are predominantly with others of his adoptive parents' ethnicity, rather than with poorer blacks.

Thus, the notion of 'racism' in the US is no longer an accurate one, and the concept of 'culturism' provides a better assessment of why income disparities exist between whites and blacks across and within dozens of nations today. The evidence is overwhelming, but discussion of culturism may also become a societal taboo.

But this concept is not complete without mention of the third type of culture that exists in the modern world : the Wheelbarrow cultures.

When using a wheelbarrow, a person can move greater weight than without the wheelbarrow. But when the person stops pushing it, the wheelbarrow cannot move at all. If a person were analogous to a wheelbarrow, such a person would be capable of greatness if guided by the right people, but would achieve nothing without such mentorship. This characteristic can even be seen in entire cultures.

India and China are countries that as recently as the 1970s, were just as poor as most African nations. At the same time, Indians and Chinese are the two wealthiest ethnic groups in the US, with an average educational level and household income substantially higher (greater than 1.5X) than that of whites. This is also true of Indian and Chinese communities in Britain and Australia. Even after adjusting for educational levels, the natural question arises about why India and China themselves are so poor despite the remarkable consistency with which their emigrants outperform the members of their new host countries.

It appears that Indians and Chinese often succeed in corelation to the quality of their surroundings. Speaking from direct experience, Indians tend to be people who are driven to do well when they feel they are guests in another country, and greatly fear the prospect of appearing unimpressive to non-Indians. The subconscious need to gain the approval of white people is very important to many Indians, and I suspect the same is true for many Chinese. When Indians are in India, on the other hand, they often default back to unsophisticated and unproductive habits, often with little interest in self-improvement or the betterment of Indian society. Leading Indian entrepreneur Kanwal Rekhi once said, "Indians are a first-rate people in a third-rate country. We compete with the best and brightest everywhere, but fail collectively."

Other examples abound. Countries like Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore speeded ahead of the PRC in economic growth, despite having the same Han Chinese population, due to each having active American/British economic mentorship. The same can even be observed in North and South Korea, where the economic disparity between the two can be described as one group of wheelbarrows being successfully pushed by the US while the other got no suitable mentorship, and thus remains Communist (a byproduct of wheelbarrows not being pushed by the right people).

This, therefore, brings us to the final concept of this treatise, which is the "Double Wheelbarrow Effect".

For a society with untapped wheelbarrow potential to achieve prosperity within the confines of its own culture, it becomes necessary to see examples of members of their culture doing well en masse. This permits traditional inferiority complexes vis-a-vis whites to vanish and permit previously disenfranchised people to gather the courage to ask "Why not us?". The prosperity of the first few wheelbarrows can then be multiplied. This can also be called 'globalization'.

Taiwan and Hong Kong were extremely poor in the 1950s, but rapid wheelbarrow-driven growth leading to prosperity by the 1980s, combined with the Chinese-American community in the US reaching critical mass around the same time, created an army of ethnic Chinese with the knowledge and skills to rapidly expand business ties with the PRC. So the former wheelbarrows themselves are now enabling mainland Chinese to achieve their full wheelbarrow potential. Hence, the rapid growth of the PRC became possible when it did, and the double-wheelbarrow growth is going strong even after 20 years.

India, unlike China, does not have the equivalent of Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore where the wheelbarrow effect could begin 20 years prior due to Chinese seeing other Chinese attaining wealth, so India had to wait for the Indian community in the US (and to a lesser degree in the UK) to achieve critical mass and visible wheelbarrow maturity. This did not happen until the 2000s, and so the Double Wheelbarrow Effect could not benefit India until recently. Now, India is finally growing rapidly as US corporations open divisions in India and teach Indian workers about American corporate practices, which long ago had origins in Anglo-Protestant value systems. This Double Wheelbarrow education results in India being widely discussed in business magazines that just 10 years ago scarcely found any reasons to mention India.

In other words :

Step 1 : Indian engineer comes to US in late 1960s/1970s, gets job, feels xenophobic, but does well in career. Bonds with other Indians he would normally not be friends with in India.

Step 2 : He and his friends rise to senior management or start companies, and by the 2000s, are multimillionaires.

Step 3 : He helps his company start divisions in India, teaching Indians how productive businesses are run in America, what habits are good to develop and what traditional Indian practices should be jettisoned in the interest of producing something of value. He meanwhile teaches white American colleagues how many opportunities exist by using what India has to offer and persuades them to invest further.

Thus, the Double Wheelbarrow Effect is what is responsible for the rise of China starting in the 1980s and India starting in the 2000s. The conventional wisdom credits China's 1979 reforms and India's 1991 reforms, but those merely represent the locks being taken off the wheelbarrows. The actual pushing could only have happened when it did, not sooner, due to the need of the first diaspora wheelbarrows to achieve critical mass. But now, the double wheelbarrow tide is so strong that India and China are even devising ambitious space programs.

I'm going to give this subject a bit more thought and make some tweaks to the article (I, too, am a wheelbarrow). There is more to be done on this subject.

TrackBack

Comments

"Dinocrat" recently posted on a similar topic on how societies with sharia as the guiding law of the culture are doomed to poverty. A few years ago Ralph Peters wrote for the publication of the Army War College on the signs of failed states. Both of these articles would appear to support your assertions from slightly different viewpoints.

Culture, politics, and economics are all mixed together. One need look at the failed USSR and other communist failed nations. Capitalism and freedom reign supreme although not free from severe recessions.

Australia and Canada are great nations with a lot of wonderful people, full of achievements. On the other hand,your reasoning is fallacious at best. Or naive to say the least. The statistics notwithstanding. And, it is not because I am Haitian. Further I am not offended by, at the very least, your seeming naivete or what you call 'lack of political correctness. You've forgotten to take into account that wealth/knowledge was transferred wholesale from Europe to Australia,Canada---two very enormous lands with enornous natural resources. ON THE OTHER HAND, Haiti was boycotted, embargoed by EUROPE and USA. Haiti stood ALONE---NOT accepted by the world of nations under European hegemony. And, unless you have thousands of people working for you as slaves, Haiti----land of the mountains----is just that-----mountains. i.e. large scale agriculture is just about impossible-----unless you have zillions of slave working for free as France did. Thus, your comparison is not quite fair. After Liberation, Haiti's growth was stunted by the European powers and USA. Australia's / Canada's was facilitated/catalyzed by Europe. Also, it does not help that France, backed by military might, extorted millions from a nascent Haiti, which plunged the country in enormous debt from which it has not recovered. Now even if one can be blinded by ethnocentrism, any numskull will admit that such a start is hardly conducive to national growth. Another, Haiti's feet were tied up at the start-line by Europe/USA. Australia's/Canada were cheered on by the Europe. We have otherwide some national achievements that may even surpass Australia /Canada: we've developped our own language, religion, and we have produced some of the most educated minds in the Americas. Even with a high illiteracy rate in beloved Haiti, the typical average educated Haitian is as or more educated than the average Westerner in Australia/Canada/ the West. Once Haiti finds a way to neutralize neocolonialism, it should be able to raise itself from the poverty you've described, and which is quite true. The promised we represented early of being a beacon is not etinguished-----it is merely dimmed. Don't count us out yet!

Natural resources are not the only reason for wealth. Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, etc. have no natural resources, while Zaire, Angola, etc. have abundant resources. Look at who is poor and who is rich.

Embargos alone cannot explain why Haiti is so much poorer than *every* nation in the Americas. Cuba has had stricter embargos than Haiti, and is still much richer than Haiti.

Haiti does not even have the capability of getting tourism business that just about every other country in that region gets a lot of.

Sorry, but Haiti's poverty is due to the same reason as Africa's. Your attempt to blame the US and Europe for Haiti's poverty is merely proving my point. Haiti should, at least, be equal to Cuba, Dominica, or Jamaica.

I truly hope Haiti does rise so that the last example of extreme poverty in the Western Hemi is erased, but I don't see evidence of this yet.

I would also add the "stereotype threat effect" to the analysis of culture. If the treat of re-enforcing a negative stereotype can have a significant effect on an individual's performance on tasks, it would be surprising if perceived negative stereotypes did not have a sort of breaking effect on certain cultures.

I am not arguing against your view of the importance of culture in political and economic conditions but there is also the cultural impact of colonialism and slavery itself. Countries like Canada and Australia consider themselves (due to ancestry,) descendants of colonial powers rather than victims of it. People in the nations of Africa may, to some extent, be under the impression that their post colonial performance reflects on whether or not they, in some way "deserved" to be colonized. Hence stereotype threat becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Cultures, attitudes and beliefs do not spread as fast as fashions or trends, it it true, but they are spreading faster than ever before and it does not take a wholesale change in culture to begin to see improvements. There are many countries that are far from British culture that have seen rapid progress upon the adoption of just some of the principles of free-enterprise and liberty.

I generally disagree with jen's post, but there are important points in it. Among the interwoven cultural attributes you mention, the economic one is most important. French and Spanish colonies were far more oppressed than English ones, with the Dutch and Portuguese somewhere between. Nothing like a free market operated for most of the inhabitants.

Free markets create uneven wealth, which is what socialists dislike about it. Even in a free market, not all people can or will take advantage of it at first. For development, it is important only that some are able to partake in it by some measure of merit, rather than nepotism or violence.

Black incomes in America did not begin to rise sharply until after WWII. Many of us believe that the welfare state arrived to suck the juice out of black advancement just as the final legal protections were being put into place. History cannot be repeated, of course, so the hypothesis cannot be tested, but there is some indication of a slowing of the rate of growth of black incomes starting around 1965.

Nonetheless, there were opportunities for some, and the income of American blacks are not only higher than incomes of other blacks around the world, they are higher than Sweden's. The freeing of the market increases both conflict and cooperation in people, but cooperation far more.

I will note my subjective observation from traveling abroad. Even in the western European countries, with great advantages of education and stable culture, I do not see the gift for spontaneous organization one sees in Americans. It is not that there are no Germans or Hungarians who can rapidly adjust, but that there are fewer. Perhaps the ability is not expressed because the culture does not reward it as much.

I wish more American blacks knew how far ahead they are of virtually everyone else in this quality. People come from Eastern Europe and work hard and get ahead in all that American Dream sense, but most do not develop this ability to adjust. Their children, who grow up with it, show as much as many Americans whose families have been here longer. African-Americans have much more of this ability than they realize, because their lower starting point economically masks the ability. But American teenagers of any race can organize and divide work better than adults in most other countries. "Okay, we'll pick up the small ones while you guys all do the big ones, and Jacob will go with Livingston to get lunch for all of us, 'cuz they've got cars. When they get back, whoever is ahead will take a break and the lunch guys will help the others." Bang. Gone. Done. European children socialize and finesse their way into the solution, which takes forever.

Kudos on the cojones my friend, sad to say you’ll probably be made to regret this post.

Unfortunately the left has already been heading you off at the pass.

A while back the Seattle public schools posted this on its web site under “Definitions of racism”.

“Cultural Racism:

Those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness, and devalue, stereotype, and label people of color as “other”, different, less than, or render them invisible. Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology, defining one form of English as standard, and identifying only Whites as great writers or composers.”

God knows a “future time orientation” has no known use in business.

They then took down the statement when they were made to look like fools in the press and replaced it with a statement that included this lovely little bit of a priori:

“Our intention is not to put up additional barriers or develop an “us against them” mindset,
nor is it to continue to hold onto unsuccessful concepts such as a melting pot or colorblind mentality.”

Thanks. My hope is that the Double Wheelbarrow Effect causes Indian psychology to adapt so that Bollywood films become more intellectually deep and marketable to worldwide audiences and Indian cricket becomes more competitive.

For example, Dennis Lillee has been training Indians in the art of fast bowling in Chennai for 20 years. However, only one or two decent fast bowlers have emerged in that time, and certainly none of Lillee's calibre. The wheelbarrow effect did not materialize as it was a single wheelbarrow effect. However, the *Double* Wheelbarrow Effect of the now wealthy Indian diaspora could cause more money and more aggressive psychology to pervade across India, resulting in (finally) better cricketers after 2010.

Pakistan benefitted from the Double Wheelbarrow Effect in fast bowling (but nothing else) much earlier, where a UK-Oxford educated Imran Khan played county cricket, brought his knowledge to Pakistan, and created Wasim, Waqar, etc. who were from humble backgrounds and would never have been noticed if not for Imran scouting alleys and villages for talent. All these people are from Lahore which is right on the Indian border, and hence there is no genetic difference. It is a psychological one, with Pathan/Punjabi wheelbarrow psychology benefitting from the infusion of UK country cricket that Imran brought to push the wheelbarrows.

The Lillee vs. Imran single vs. double wheelbarrow distinction is critical but often unnoticed.

I think you're a bit too quick to dismiss the influence of communist dictatorships. Under those, citizens could not start business or organize in any form not approved by the state. Mao tried the "cultural revolution" to erase the previous Chinese culture and replace it with his own form of communism - and I think he suceeded in part.

(1) There is no such thing as "African culture." Africa is a continent, not a country or ethnic group.

(2) Correlation is not causation. It is insufficient to simply point out that countries with large numbers of people with African descent remain poor to prove your thesis. This finding is consistent with a number of explanations, not just the "culture" thesis. You need to identify those aspects of "African culture" that allegedly contribute to this poor performance.

It doesn't need to be. There are many languages, peoples, and tribes across sub-Saharan Africa, but almost all exhibit some common traits.

And which traits shared by people of African descent throughout the world have caused them to lag behind peoples of other backgrounds in wealth development?

This finding is consistent with a number of explanations, not just the "culture" thesis.

Like what?

Other theses that could possibly explain these phenomena is that the impact of colonialism was more severe of African descent. And of course a theory of inherent racial inferiority would explain this phenomenon as well. I'm not suggesting either of these theories are correct, I'm simply pointing out that a case for the culture thesis needs to explain why it is better than other explanations at explaining the phenomenon. This post essentially just identifies the phenomenon and then jumps to the conclusion that the cause must be culture, without providing an independent argument in support of the culture thesis. As suggested above, some plausible examples of the "African" cultural traits that allegedly differ from the cultural traits of more successful ethnic groups would make this argument more persuasive.

I'd like to point out that there were (and are) wealthy Indian industrialists (for. eg Tata and Godrej) even in colonial India. For that matter there have always been many visibly wealthy, successful people in India, but there was no wheelbarrow effect. It was simply because usually the means for attaining success are good health and education, which were denied to most Indians due to colonialism, caste system and other social flaws.

There have actually been successfully Indians in America for a really long time (eg. Amar Bose (b. 1929)) but economic growth there accelerated only after 1991. post the collapse of the Soviet Union (socialist's India's major political and economic partner) and market reforms.

I thus believe your wheelbarrow theory does not have any rational grounds, it is pure speculation.

I'd also like to hear you answer Josh's query on what particular African cultural traits make them unproductive.

I'd like to point out that there were (and are) wealthy Indian industrialists (for. eg Tata and Godrej) even in colonial India.

These are anecdotal examples, and indicative of nothing at the macro level. Africa has industrialists too. It is the average that matters, and until the 1980s, India's average household prosperity level was on par with most of Africa.

There have actually been successfully Indians in America for a really long time (eg. Amar Bose (b. 1929))

He too achieved success in the 1970s and later, along the same time as other early Indians in the US. This example proves my point, rather than yours.

Surely you know that as recently as 1980, there were only 250,000 Indians in the US, vs. 2.4 million in 2006 (minors included in both numbers).

Your counterargument is weak if anecdotal points are all you can provide, particularly when you also provide no alternative reason why India was one of the world's poorest countries, despite the success they achieved in favorable foreign systems (usually Anglo-Protestant ones).

I'd also like to hear you answer Josh's query on what particular African cultural traits make them unproductive.

Re-read the article, and the links contained within. The answer is provided.

These are anecdotal examples, and indicative of nothing at the macro level.

Your thesis was that a 'visible' wealthy class (apparently of ones own race) motivates the lower classes of the same race to work hard and achieve success. Tata and Godrej were very successful Indians, visible to the masses (watch Hindi movies from the 50's onwards) but we achieved no success as a people till recently.

particularly when you also provide no alternative reason why India was one of the world's poorest countries

I did mention colonialism, caste system and other social flaws, read my post carefully.

Re-read the article, and the links contained within. The answer is provided.

I agree with a lot of what your sources say, regarding the restrictions on free flow of info. , subjugation of women etc. but these were flaws present in American and English societies even in the early 20th century (American women earned the right to vote only in the 1920s and Christainlity is still a powerful force in America). All cultures have flaws. To claim that these flaws are inherent in African culture is fallacious, you will have to prove it if you want to claim it.

(American women earned the right to vote only in the 1920s and Christainlity is still a powerful force in America).

Protestant Christianity is one of the many reasons America, Australia, and the UK became powerful. Show me one Christian-majority nation that does not allow equal voting rights for women. Plus, 1920 was still earlier than just about any other country, regarding women's voting rights.

Your anti-Christian statement is uninformed and biased.

The flaws within African culture are numerous, and explained already. If you doubt it, you may want to consider investing on one of those 'URGENT and CONFIDENTIAL' email business ventures. A brief review of Kofi Annan's ethical history will reveal a similar pattern of behavior as the email entrepreneurs.

You, in turn, have not offered any alternative explanation for their collective failure.

If you doubt it, you may want to consider investing on one of those 'URGENT and CONFIDENTIAL' email business ventures.

Nigerian scammers? That's your evidence? I suppose we are to conclude that Americans are culturally inferior, since we see a lot of ads for snake-oil "performance" pills from Americans in our inboxes.

As for the "Seven Factors," which is the only attempt at identifying the cultural traits I asked for, they appear generally applicable to many different cultures. Subjugation of women is still common in Asian cultures, for example, and I'm sure you'll agree that China restricts the free flow of information. So none of these are specifically "African", and thus your thesis remains insufficiently supported to be persuasive.

I would have to agree with the article - Africans posess many unsavory traits.

1. Africans steal money from each other and from trusting foreigners. They know nothing about honest business, only scamming.

2. Africans are bloodthirstly, readily jumping at any excuse to commit an atrocity. Africans who are superficially Muslims revel in the violent aspects of Islam - stoning, beheading, genital mutilation - but never actually, say, read scriptures or pray (these non-violent activities don't appeal to Africans).

3. Africans invariably find increasingly grotesque ways in which to behave in an animalistic manner. Cannibalism was practiced by heads of state like Idi Amin and Mobuto Sese Seko. Liberian political leaders routinely torture and mutilate each other.

4. AIDS is far more prevalent in Africa than anywhere else due to the high incidence of Sodomy in Africa. Far more than anywhere else.

I totally agree with your wheelbarrow effect. But I fail to understand how you can say that Indians' mentality has changed? There is still only a very miniscule section of Indian society that dreams big .The sucess of the BPO's has been hyped beyond anything.India may rule in the IT sector worldwide presently but its just a temporary phase. atleast until the babus remain our politicians.

Good question. Irrespective of the IT industry, throughout India, the spread of the information age has created a huge generation gap. Go to almost any family outside of the top 1% elites, and the young children (age 10-17) are much sharper than their parents. They are web savvy, have much better English, etc. There is a gigantic intellectual jump. When these kids become adults, India becomes a different country. They don't have to all work in IT. Their intelleutual progress can apply to all spheres.

In America, by contrast, the people aged 45-60 are already quite modern, and so are much less behind their own children in terms of 21st century skills.

So why is the outcome of the two populations of African origin so incredibly worse than that of the two populations of Anglo-Saxon Protestant origin?

One word : Culture.

The fact that you believe you can condense the solution to such a complex topic, which involves an unimaginably large set of variables into a single word is absurd. The fact that you seem to be so thoroughly assured of the validity of your contentions just makes the matter even worse. I do agree that culture plays an undeniable role in shaping the economic fate of a region; however, claiming to have identified the root of of the issue with so little research is idiotic. What you've posted here is weakly supported conjecture at best.

People devote lifetimes to studying questions like these, and I can only hope that unlike you, those people have the humility to concede that whatever conclusions they reach are not necessarily correct.

The need to gain the approval of white people is very important to many Indians, and I suspect the same is true for many Chinese.

I find the notion that Indian and Chinese immigrants are motivated to succeed in order to "gain the approval of white people" to be misguided and condescending beyond words. While again, the point you raised might play a minuscule role in a much larger equation, there is much, much more going on than you seem to realize. To begin with, I suspect that many immigrant families who succeed in the United States come from successful families with productive habits.

A possible alternative explanation to "succeed in order to gain approval" is they come from long term cultures and can adapt to take advantage of a better performing one. When they return they can install the performance modifications in their own to achieve similar results.

I know that this is about a year too late. But I'd like to provide some empirical evidence that counters John's "...notion that Indian and Chinese immigrants are motivated to succeed in order to "gain the approval of white people" to be misguided and condescending beyond words"

In India, there is a thriving market for 'whitening' or bleaching products for a woman's skin. There is a great social push for women to be more 'fair' or white. It has gotten so bad that women have been damaging their skin with some of the more extreme 'products', just as our drive for thin women have pushed women into anorexia and bulimia.

This also exists in my wife's home country, The Philippines, where only 3-4% of the population is descended from Europeans (mostly spanish) but that 3-4% dominates 99% of the media jobs (news anchors, talk show and game show hosts and acting).

Also in the Philippines, pedigree forgery is quite a going business as well, for the same reasons.

In both cases, this has been attributed by sociologists as traits of a colonial mentality. I also have quite a few anecdotal stories of myself seeing this close up during my various trips to the Philippines and interactions with my wife even here in the US.

My favorite one was my wife telling me how she and her friends would believe what they read in the National Enquirer because it was an American newspaper and so they didn't want to risk looking stupid by questioning what was in it.
After all -- it was American.

Oh, and John - you remind me of the people living in the Bubble City in the film Logan's Run, who didn't have to deal with the reality of how the world really was until the dome collapsed and they had to evacuate. You need to get out more.

re: Asst Village Idiot
You are so very right!
But I also suspect there is another factor.

In America, for most of history, there was a low 'elite' population authorized to 'run things'. Thus, when immediate work *had* be be done for the common good? Well, the rule I learned was 'them as complains volunteers'. In Europe, however, there was always an 'aristocrat' of some sort with the *right* to take command ( however poorly) and the 'presuming peasant' who tried to take charge was... well... not exactly going to be rewarded.
It makes a difference in the national attitude that much survives the first cause.

I agree with the general thesis about culture being the determining factor. But that includes the obvious as well as the subtle aspects of culture. Someone asked what Africa's many diverse cultures have in common that might impede progress. One obvious answer is that sub-Saharan Africa lacked a literary tradition/alphabet until this century. Compared with China, India and the Middle East, which all had at least a literary elite for thousands of years. I wonder if this is why some cultures can more easily become "wheel barrow" cultures, whereas others have further to go.

My next question is, what does it take to move up to being at least a wheelbarrow culture, able to benefit from a more educated and prosperous diaspora?

There is some evidence that a society that was once a cultural, scientific, and literary hub will maintain at least wheelbarrow status for several centuries hence. India, China, Persia, Greece, Mesopotamia, etc. all qualify.

This could also by why Iraq is integrating into the global economy somewhat more readily than Afghanistan is, despite Iraq's violence level being higher.

This is one of the ridiculous article that keep throwing out theories after theories without providing an iota of proof. The concept is wheelbarrow where mentorship plays the crucial role . In my opinion , it was India only which gave the world concept of 'Guru' . A guru is one who removes darkness and this term and its application were well in age that even generations of the post write did not exist. The reason that European and American society have existed that they have leached the old world that is India and China for years and years. Who can forget the long time oppression of Indians firs t at the hands of Muslims and then Christian British. Before these guys came and colonized India, if you read properly, India held 25% of world GDP and China other 25%. If your country is under 800 years of Mughal Rule and 200 years of British rule and that too so brutal your fate is that you lose your culture. Yes we have lost that culture of tolerance and compassion but the invaders are largely ( mark my words here ) responsible for it. Before british rule, we never had a reported occurrence of people dying of hunger but after their rule and till today people are dying because there is no food. This is because if you know a little bit of history, due to large scale exploitation of British rule and their divide and rule policy. They were cunning and devious and did nothing to improve the mass lot while encouraging baboos. At independence they just left the country to fend for itself, without making logical improvements in system of governance. As a result the mindset of Rich -poor continued, the concept of ruler - ruled continued.

People do not go to USA. I am my self in IT and sincerely ask me if I want to go to any other country, I would not . Because I have been to all 'so called' major economies and found most of them racist to the ocre ( Esp. England and Australia). America though is a big exception and all my thanks to that . The people who want to prove themselves equal to whites are victim of the same divided created by white man. They want to prove someone wrong or themselves superior. I would say Americans and Brits do not have that feeling because they are ruling the world now. But on all aspects that are related to Spiritual and equanimous life, they are far far away from what India taught.

Hence this post according to me is totally out of understanding of India's history and impact of invaders ( christians/ british ) on average Indian psyche which has been beaten down.

Our growth from 1991 have been phenomenal only due to the fact that we have been realeased from the old shackles and not because of some American corporation. Come to India and see the new found confidence. And this does not come only from working in an MNC.

India's economic failure after 1950 cannot be blamed on outsiders, but rather on Nehruvian socialism, which itself is an outcome of Indian cultural baggage. Taiwan and South Korea were just as poor as India in 1950, but now are about 25 times wealthier per capita.

Also, the progress of India after 1991 is not impressive, it is still much slower than China. The 1991 opening of the economy was simply due to Indian leaders no longer being able to keep out the increasing pull of market forces surrounding India.

So, the 1991 progress was not because of any Indian brilliance, but rather in spite of Indian cultural baggage and lethargy that could no longer prevent the rest of the world from dragging India along with it.

India is still one of the lowest human development countries outside of Africa.

People do not go to USA.

This is shockingly ignorant. About 2 million leave India each year. 100,000 of these go to the US, and many millions would if the US allowed that many to enter.

Hence this post according to me is totally out of understanding of India's history and impact of invaders ( christians/ british ) on average Indian psyche which has been beaten down.

How many decades will you keep blaming others, rather than accept your own shortcomings and work on them?

Let me take your points one by one
**
India's economic failure after 1950 cannot be blamed on outsiders, but rather on Nehruvian socialism, which itself is an outcome of Indian cultural baggage. Taiwan and South Korea were just as poor as India in 1950, but now are about 25 times wealthier per capita.
***

Why are you so much concentrating on Post independence India. How can you discount pre-Independence factors. I have written very clearly about the fact that before invaders invaded India , it had a huge share of world's wealth. Infact this wealth only attracted the colonial nations who were experiencing a rise after industrial revolution. They needed to get raw material for their own industry. One way was definately to look for places which could supply raw material and cheap labour. Indian economy was not in tatters before invaders came here. You cannot take a period of only recent 40 years and make me believe that I should not consider nearly 2000 years of prosperity. This is a very narrow time frame not enough to quantify the gains / losses made by a country. We had to follow one policy which could have been either Socialist or capitalist. Our leaders chose Socialist because at that time it appeared more appealing. Now that it does not work does not mean that something else could have been chosen. While countries like Japan, Korea, Taiwan etc chose to be with USA. USA won the cold war and hence it was able to drive these countries with its policies. While India on the other hand had a very healthy opposition of US policies as any democracy should have. I agree that today this opposition is only for sake of it but once it was effective. Second, the conuntries like Korea etc have a very uniform society .It is much easier to influence them to a mindset. However , India had always had a alternate viewpoint ( please read Amartya Sen's book A thousand Mutinee's) . These viewpoints now harbour to extremism in some cases but neverthless , people do have voice to say what they want to say.

**So, the 1991 progress was not because of any Indian brilliance, but rather in spite of Indian cultural baggage and lethargy that could no longer prevent the rest of the world from dragging India along with it.

I do not agree with you at all that Indians are lethargic and we need a Phantom to protect us. Before so called MNCs arrived , we had TATA , Birla , Godrej who can be called world class in any sense. It was only because of the obstuctionist nature of our politicians, these companies could not grow to size. Today a TATA takes over JLR. Just wait before India takes over your loved non- Indian companies.

***India is still one of the lowest human development countries outside of Africa.

Agreed, but is that not because of the fact that there are certain members of the country who are not doing anything to change the oountry. According to every report that you read on India, it is babus who are most corrupt. The word babu comes from Pre- Independence days. These babus were like slaves of britsh empire and helped the empire in all possible ways. The sad part is still we are not able to remove this problem . A new Indian initiative called RTI has definately makeing these babus shake in pants. Things are going to change dont worry. The corruption once routed , will pave the way for better standards of living.

**This is shockingly ignorant. About 2 million leave India each year. 100,000 of these go to the US, and many millions would if the US allowed that many to enter.

FYI.. I am myself an H1B holder but I am in India. I do not wish to goto USA at all. The reasons a people leave a place is all the same . Corruption, lack of opportunities, lack of growth , crime etc etc. For last 60 years yes we had too much of either everything or too less of it but things are changing. I hope you heard of the news that people in USA would love to come back to India. India is not the place it used to be . Though traffic is bad, electricity , water is still a problem , but there is a lot of energy and enthusiasm in young generation. This is a generation that wants to make a change and you have to be in India to witness it and not in some other corner of the world. So trust me with India rising , I see inflow of Indian and non - Indians rather that outflow.

***lso, the progress of India after 1991 is not impressive, it is still much slower than China.

Do not even compare these two countries. If you give me a lot of power to shoot people , forcibly evict them , have enormous government powers, I would make India as powerful and growing as US . Unfortunately we have to go slow we are a democracy.

It is true. In Korea, Japan, and now China, there it is common for women to get eye-widening surgery.

The cosmetic pressure to look 'white' affects women a lot more than men, though, whether it be Indians trying to lighten their skin, Koreans widening their eyes, etc.

Please do not try to project whole Indian mass ready to get white. There are definitely bad fishes and lot of them too but making them a representative of India is like one NRI pulling down India because he is in some other country and feels that every NRI thinks so.

The cosmetic pressure to look 'white' affects women a lot more than men, though, whether it be Indians trying to lighten their skin, Koreans widening their eyes, etc.

In India, this is even more rampant, with 'Gori Gori' soaps and other such products. All film actresses have much lighter skin than the average Indian. Skin color is the single greatest determinant of looks in Indian society, far more than eye width is in Korea/China.

I have written very clearly about the fact that before invaders invaded India , it had a huge share of world's wealth.

India's peak was around the year 0, and from 0 to 1800 had already declined slowly. The fast decline was from 1800 to 1970. But you cannot cling to the wealth of 200, or 2000 years ago, crying over the 10 different invaders over 2000 years who saw an easy opportunity.

This is what I mean by Indian cultural baggage. The question to ask is, why was India so easy to take advantage of, whether the Greeks, Ghaznavids, Mughals, British, or French?

Our leaders chose Socialist because at that time it appeared more appealing.

Because Nehru was ignorant about economics. He ruined the lives of 500 million Indians.

It was only because of the obstuctionist nature of our politicians, these companies could not grow to size.

Indian politicians are merely a reflection of Indian culture, as with any other democratic country. The public is culpable in producing such politicians.

Just wait before India takes over your loved non- Indian companies.

India is still only 2% of world GDP, so foreigners will take over India about 50 times faster than vice-versa.

A new Indian initiative called RTI has definately makeing these babus shake in pants.

Again, babus are a product of Indian culture, and are no more corrupt than the population in general. India's cultural flaws ensure poverty. These flaws range from arranged marriage, resistance to ideas, xenophobia even within small sub-castes within a caste, laziness, etc.

I hope you heard of the news that people in USA would love to come back to India.

Sorry, the opinions of two people you heard somewhere don't matter against actual statistics. India has about 1 million people a year fleeing. The US has about 2 million a year coming in, and it would be much higher if a larger quota was allowed. Indians are the second largest group of immigrants to the US, after Mexicans. Of Indians who come to the US, 90% never return to India.

Facts are facts.

So trust me with India rising

At the present 8% rate of growth, India will take 30 years to get to where Mexico is today.

I would make India as powerful and growing as US . Unfortunately we have to go slow we are a democracy.

Indians make fools of themselves by saying this to the world. All the wealthiest countries are democracies (US, Japan, UK, Australia, France). The excuse that Indians use of "we are democracy, so we can't grow as fast as China" is a joke that no one outside India believes. India's cultural limitations are the reason for India's poverty.

Again, Taiwan and South Korea were not Communist countries. They were as poor as India in 1950. Now they are 35 times richer per capita. How will you use the 'democracy' excuse here.

You cannot escape the fact that Indian culture/mentality is to blame for India's poverty. The good news is that unlike African culture, India's culture is at least a 'wheelbarrow culture', and thus benefits from the overseas wheelbarrows, and eventually the 'double wheelbarrow effect', which is clearly visible in the success of Bangalore.

The invisible hand of American capitalism is what is both directly (through MNCs) and indirectly (through NRIs) is what is saving India, despite the negative forces of Indian culture/mentality that continue to drag progress down.

More idiotic answers. One thing you forgot was to tell me if you are an NRI. I now suspect strongly that you are one of the Indians that go abroad and then go on top of the mountain and cry that India is a horrible place. That way you feel better in eyes of all the 'white men' you have been praising.

Anyway lets start.

**The cosmetic pressure to look 'white' affects women a lot more than men, though, whether it be Indians trying to lighten their skin, Koreans widening their eyes, etc.

Didnot find anything great to start with is it ? Have you heard of Aneroxia, Obesity. Most of the white world in one part of the world is afflicted by either of these. But I have never seen a person decride their fellows because they have a problem. Its only people like you who love to disparage your own country on all fronts. For every article that you bring out of the fairness affliction of Indian , I can bring thousands on defects in the people you admire.

**I have written very clearly about the fact that before invaders invaded India , it had a huge share of world's wealth.

India's peak was around the year 0, and from 0 to 1800 had already declined slowly. The fast decline was from 1800 to 1970. But you cannot cling to the wealth of 200, or 2000 years ago, crying over the 10 different invaders over 2000 years who saw an easy opportunity.

This is what I mean by Indian cultural baggage. The question to ask is, why was India so easy to take advantage of, whether the Greeks, Ghaznavids, Mughals, British, or French?

Yeah that is a fantastic question. I think it is purely because of people like you who we have not been able to throw out from our country. Because of the people who think more or less like you , India has been a backward country for years and years. Remember Jaichand who went to Mughals and betrayed Prithviraj. secondly , if you are a little aware of Indian esp Hindu relegion , the main philosophy is Ahimsa, which is non violence. It had been fully practiced all across India from thousands of years. THe main thing was to find ourselves by looking inwardd and not conquering the enemies. BTW India is the only country that never invaded any other country with the exception of Bangaladesh to save the people from mass genocide. Can you let me know of any other forieng power which has refrained from attacking another country. The simple and easy mindset was easy for someone to conquer and with traitors in plenty it was more easy. But what is the point in discussing this I dont understand.

** People fleeing India is a news. Where did you read that . Most people go abroad to work,earn money and send it back home . The money that they send is used to purchase land , perform marriages support old folks etc. If they had no confidence in India, they would not have sent a dime . After all it is very difficult to work abroad ,save and send money back home . But Indians have a highest remittance of money to India in world. That means most of them are connected to motherland even if they are not coming back

***At the present 8% rate of growth, India will take 30 years to get to where Mexico is today.
good comparison. Also please provide the names of companies from Mexico which are in stature to Infosys, wipro , Tata. Also please let me know if Mexicans have so many cultures and issues . And also let me know the size of Mexico economy vis a vis India and how much money is flowing in IT and BPO to Mexico in comparison to India .

***The excuse that Indians use of "we are democracy, so we can't grow as fast as China" is a joke that no one outside India believes. India's cultural limitations are the reason for India's poverty.

There are limitations I am not disagreeing but despite that buddy it is called as a asian giant. One of the fastest growing econmies of the world. As long as I heard Europe was in decline . Why should I even tell this fact to anyone outside India. There are real problems and people are trying to solve them and not whining as you are doing sitting in a far away country.

**Again, Taiwan and South Korea were not Communist countries. They were as poor as India in 1950. Now they are 35 times richer per capita. How will you use the 'democracy' excuse here.

When did I say that they were communist. Who says democracy is an excuse . What I am saying inspite of so much troubles and a lack of consensus on alomst everything , we are doing very good . We can do better but then there are issues which need to be sorted out before we can truly achieve a good growth . Even then for me 8% growth is not bad.

**You cannot escape the fact that Indian culture/mentality is to blame for India's poverty. The good news is that unlike African culture, India's culture is at least a 'wheelbarrow culture', and thus benefits from the overseas wheelbarrows, and eventually the 'double wheelbarrow effect', which is clearly visible in the success of Bangalore.

The invisible hand of American capitalism is what is both directly (through MNCs) and indirectly (through NRIs) is what is saving India, despite the negative forces of Indian culture/mentality that continue to drag progress down.

Good now I know you are an NRI. There is no substantive proof of this . It is quite possible that IT was a starting factor . But there are a many things which is propelling India forward. First we have a very strong telecommunication which is - ( minus ) any NRI or MNC presence. As you know Airtel is wholly an Indian company.
Second, our tourism and hospitality sector though not great but is big enough to support a large number of employees. This mainly runs on account of domestic tourism.
Third, our banking institutions are much better than any of the US as can be seen right now . None of the Indian banks have even blinked an eye while the world bleeds.

I am sorry but what an NRI does is to serve the foreign country while his own country bleeds and then writes articles such as you have written .
My sincere suggestion is to you to come back to India and shower us with your mentality so that we can change ours . I know you are not going to that because you are too busy criticizing.

I just read your article once again for the heck of it . You said India's space program has now come into age. A great joke one more time . India's space program was started way back when India started developing missiles on its own ( read it on its own without foriegn assitance ) . We are the only country that have a history of not selling nuclear and Missile tech to any other country. To quote some of the missile names ( agni , prithvi, akash , nag were not loaned to us by any country). The world's most capable misslie Brahmos is a joint venture between Russian and India ( Brah from Brahma and Mos from moscow) . Its hard work of all these 50 years that is bringing so much fruit that our scientists are embarking on ambitious moon mission. Check your facts and facts are facts

Sorry for the post again. The more I read the links that you have given the more funnier your arguments get
In your WIKI article about colonial mentality it mentiones US

United States of America; Black America

The extremely race-conscious society of the United States is often cited as a prime example of colonial mentality. Numerous examples included the one drop rule and practice of the "Paper Bag Test", where African-Americans were allowed or denied entry in Black-only social institutions (bars, night clubs, cinemas, sororities, fraternities, etc.) based on how light the skin tone was when compared to a brown paper bag. Those African-Americans with skin tones the same or lighter than the paper bag were allowed entry. This practice of institutionalized colorism, favoring degrees of "whiteness", was exemplified more so by "The Blue Vein Society".

Have you read this portion too or just the one with reference to India and there too it is clearly mentioned
********
Colonial mentality refers to institutionalised or systemic feelings of inferiority within some societies or peoples who have been subjected to colonialism, relative to the mores or values of the foreign powers which had previously subjugated them.[citation needed] The concept essentially refers to the acceptance, by the colonised, of the culture or doctrines of the coloniser as intrinsically more worthy or superior. The subject matter is quite controversial.

****
Keyword is systematic. So the colonial change did happen for worse in case of India. But how can you disparaga Indians for it is not clear.

Indian culture is the reason for Indian poverty and unhappiness (India is one of the least happy countries in the world). Politicians are a byproduct of the culture that produced them. Until Indian accept this, they will continue to be one of the world's poorest countries. Denial is India's biggest affliction.

1) I clearly pointed out the obsession Indains have with lightening their skin. You could not dispute this, or the article I cited. Show me when a dark-skinned actress reaches the top of Bollywood. It appears you have conceded this point.

2) I think it is purely because of people like you who we have not been able to throw out from our country.

No one gets thrown out of India. Millions flee voluntarily, even going to the Middle East and Kenya/Tanzania for a better life.

Again, I have exposed logic and solid facts against your indoctrination, and you have degenerated to name-calling. Typical Indian immaturity.

3) BTW India is the only country that never invaded any other country with the exception of Bangaladesh to save the people from mass genocide.

Yes, but this is also a sign of weakness. India is the easiest country to invade. Also, inaction, too, can be evil. India let Tibet get invaded by China and did nothing. China saw how weak India was, and defeated India easily in 1962.

This question remains unanswered : Why was India so easy to invade and defeat, whether the Greeks, Ghaznavids, Mughals, British, French, and Chinese?

4) That means most of them are connected to motherland even if they are not coming back

No, it means they have to support their poor parents and relatives who suffer within the horrendous Indian economy. When they can get greencards for their parents, they rescue their parents by taking them out of India.

5) Also please provide the names of companies from Mexico which are in stature to Infosys, wipro , Tata.

You hid from the main point, that India's per capita income is one-tenth of Mexico, and at the current 8% rate of growth, India will take 30 years to equal Mexico's prosperity. Aside form Mexico, I could use countries like Brazil, Colombia, Thailand, Turkey, Iran, etc. as nations that are decades ahead of India in human development. Just see the map in the main article.

You have conceded this point as well.

6) Who says democracy is an excuse .

You did, when you did not like the fact that China is much further ahead than India. You claimed India's democracy made progress slower for India, after which I pointed out that the wealthiest countries are all democracies.

South Korea and Taiwan were just as poor as India in 1950 and are now 25 times higher per capita. India's failure is undeniable. Excuses like 'India is big' or 'India is a democracy' can be refuted with numerous examples.

India's culture/mentality is the reason for India's poverty, which is much more severe than in most of the world, except for Africa.

7) Second, our tourism and hospitality sector though not great but is big enough to support a large number of employees.

Tourism is a collosal failure for India. Thailand gets 10 times the tourism revenue as India, despite being a much smaller country. India has so many things that could be marketed, from mountains to beaches to safaris to historical sites. India has failed to do so, and is earning nothing compared to Thailand, Egypt, China, or even Kenya.

That you are happy with India's tiny tourism revenue, and ignore that other smaller countries earn 10 times as much, is another example of India's low expectations, and willingess to settle for mediocrity.

Stock markets are a concept invented in America in the early 19th century. The technology that runs the BSE is imported, and invented in the US.

9) My sincere suggestion is to you to come back to India and shower us with your mentality so that we can change ours

I am not born in India. India is not my home (thank goodness). I did live there for 7 years, so I gained an accurate understanding of the country. Other Indian commenters on this chain (see Tushar above) agree. One has to leave India to see how much of a huge disservice to Indian culture/mentality has done to people there.

10) Another example is how poorly India does in the Olympics. Before 2008, India would usually win zero medals, or just one by fluke. Now, they have managed to win three. That is a dramatic improvement, but still pathetic compared even to small, poor countries like Jamaica.

The usual Indian excuses of 'India is poor' or 'Indians are not interested in sports' are pathetic, given how jubilant Indias get at winning a bronze medal, or winning a cricket game against a small country like Sri Lanka.

11) Its hard work of all these 50 years that is bringing so much fruit that our scientists are embarking on ambitious moon mission.

Yes, only 60 years after America did the same.

India's space program has not put a man in space, hence it has not come of age.

12) There is no substantive proof of this .

There is overwhelming proof of this. Look at how many billboards in Indian cities have US brands. Look how many US TV shows Indian children watch. The wheelbarrow and double-wheelbarrow effect are everywhere in India.

You are the typical Indian who is in perpetual denial about the massive flaws of Indian culture, and when there is a tiny victory, you inflate the importance of it and become complacent again.

The first step towards turning India into a middle-income country, and then a developed country, is to look within, and change the flaws of Indian society.

The good news is that India is at least a wheelbarrow culture, and so will follow Taiwan and South Korea to prosperity (except that India is so far behind that it will take 50 years at the present rate).

Indian culture is the reason for Indian poverty and unhappiness (India is one of the least happy countries in the world). Politicians are a byproduct of the culture that produced them. Until Indian accept this, they will continue to be one of the world's poorest countries. Denial is India's biggest affliction.

**The most naive argument ever seen. We have the worst politicians , I never disagreed and who is denying that is out of my understanding . We are poor because of a variety of factors and not because of politicians only. I cannot accept the fact that we are most unhappy. There are a lot of people who are materially poor. But even if your favourite countries people can be uhhappy . It is not the material wealth garnered out of sucking blood from other coutries that can make someone happy. If you are happy materially its because probably your ancestors would have worked hard to generate it .

You mean to say that politicians in your country are the best in the world ?How do you decide between good and the bad? Is there any method. Almost all people I have met accross the world do not like the politicians they have. The reason for your love to them?
**

1) I clearly pointed out the obsession Indains have with lightening their skin. You could not dispute this, or the article I cited. Show me when a dark-skinned actress reaches the top of Bollywood. It appears you have conceded this point.

**What is the point of raking it up. Your countrie's fashion industry ( assuming you are from so called civilized world which has coume out from dark ages say a recently 100 years back ) is full of aneroxic bulimic people who die to appear thin. On the other side people living on McDo culture are so obsessed with food that now they need everything big ang huge in size. Obesity will kill more people in world that clamouring for fair skin. Why dont you run a campaign againts it ?

**

2) I think it is purely because of people like you who we have not been able to throw out from our country.

No one gets thrown out of India. Millions flee voluntarily, even going to the Middle East and Kenya/Tanzania for a better life.

Again, I have exposed logic and solid facts against your indoctrination, and you have degenerated to name-calling. Typical Indian immaturity.
***
Millions flee voluntarily. According to dictionary

Flee means To run away, as from trouble or danger: fled from the house into the night.
What danger is India in . If it is so why so many MNCs have opened shops in India. If millions are fleeing , then why people are sending money back home where they dont ever return.

Loss of logic leads to name calling ( I dont know where you are from but it does not provide good feelings).
***

3) BTW India is the only country that never invaded any other country with the exception of Bangaladesh to save the people from mass genocide.

Yes, but this is also a sign of weakness. India is the easiest country to invade. Also, inaction, too, can be evil. India let Tibet get invaded by China and did nothing. China saw how weak India was, and defeated India easily in 1962.

******
India was tricked by China in 1962. Before that it was Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai . I agree we were too simple to understand the wicked ways of the world or too incompetent to unearth the messages. But the lessons have been learned and now we do not trust China at all. Remember US sending warships to India when it attacked Bangladesh when mass genocide is happening.

On which side you are buddy. Not attacking some one is not weakness, not defending is. Today China cannot open a full war on India because it knows it will find it difficult to win. Tibet was an easy target non aggressive and peace loving. It took some time for Indians to understand that in this brutal world spirituality does not count much . When peace is called as weakness by some people , I do not see much progress anyway.
***

This question remains unanswered : Why was India so easy to invade and defeat, whether the Greeks, Ghaznavids, Mughals, British, French, and Chinese?
*****
One answer instead of asking questions like these try reading some history books on India.

****

4) That means most of them are connected to motherland even if they are not coming back

No, it means they have to support their poor parents and relatives who suffer within the horrendous Indian economy. When they can get greencards for their parents, they rescue their parents by taking them out of India.

5) Also please provide the names of companies from Mexico which are in stature to Infosys, wipro , Tata.

You hid from the main point, that India's per capita income is one-tenth of Mexico, and at the current 8% rate of growth, India will take 30 years to equal Mexico's prosperity. Aside form Mexico, I could use countries like Brazil, Colombia, Thailand, Turkey, Iran, etc. as nations that are decades ahead of India in human development. Just see the map in the main article.

You have conceded this point as well.
*******
When did I disagree with this ? But each country has its own problem and so has India. Why is a particular reason to put only India down is highly un - understandable
*****

6) Who says democracy is an excuse .

You did, when you did not like the fact that China is much further ahead than India. You claimed India's democracy made progress slower for India, after which I pointed out that the wealthiest countries are all democracies.

South Korea and Taiwan were just as poor as India in 1950 and are now 25 times higher per capita. India's failure is undeniable. Excuses like 'India is big' or 'India is a democracy' can be refuted with numerous examples.

India's culture/mentality is the reason for India's poverty, which is much more severe than in most of the world, except for Africa.

*******

India was not poor my dear before British came to India and I think I made my point ample clear about it . It was called as Golden Bird of the west and that is when the marauders came in , made deep divisions in our psyche and looted us to destrtoy us. This has been told in various folklores, stories, accounts. That India was a great civilization before invasion started also is well known. Now if you talk of the culture today it is a mish mash of various cultures that have been assimilated from time to time . We never said no to any person settling here. VISA is a western concept you know.
*****

7) Second, our tourism and hospitality sector though not great but is big enough to support a large number of employees.

Tourism is a collosal failure for India. Thailand gets 10 times the tourism revenue as India, despite being a much smaller country. India has so many things that could be marketed, from mountains to beaches to safaris to historical sites. India has failed to do so, and is earning nothing compared to Thailand, Egypt, China, or even Kenya.

******
Agreed. So finally you do have something positive about India. Yes we have failed miserably on attracting tourism. But that failure is on account of miserable government which does not care about people or anything . But that is the truth and the citizenary have been trying to change that and is not whining but fighting to change many things. It is a big country with 1 billion people not a small one with let us say a hundred or thousand people. To push people for a cause when most of them are fighting for daily survival is a gigantic task. But trust me change is happening and you cannot see it with your tunnel vision.
*****

That you are happy with India's tiny tourism revenue, and ignore that other smaller countries earn 10 times as much, is another example of India's low expectations, and willingess to settle for mediocrity.

***
Indian willingness to settle for mediocrity . How do you define mediocrity friend. We have the best Tech colleges in the world ( IITs) . The students that come out of there are immediately hired by your so loved MNCs. If they are so mediocre why most of the microsoft is Indian, NASA is Indian and many more .
If we are so mediocre why is world accepting the fact that Indias are definately good at things.

Stock markets are a concept invented in America in the early 19th century. The technology that runs the BSE is imported, and invented in the US.

******
And how many things US imported from others. Remember. Missile tech from Germany. Aircraft tech from USSR. Architecture from Europe. Food craft from India. When you point a finger at me three are pointed at yourself.
****

9) My sincere suggestion is to you to come back to India and shower us with your mentality so that we can change ours

I am not born in India. India is not my home (thank goodness). I did live there for 7 years, so I gained an accurate understanding of the country. Other Indian commenters on this chain (see Tushar above) agree. One has to leave India to see how much of a huge disservice to Indian culture/mentality has done to people there.

*****
7 years and this is your understanding . I do not know who Tushar D is though I have a friend by this name. Thanks for not staying in India as anyway if a person cannot say anything positive about a place being there for 7years ought to move from there. But remember if you want to come back ,India isalways open to you . Because India is sadly the only country in the world where even terrorist get media coverage.

****
10) Another example is how poorly India does in the Olympics. Before 2008, India would usually win zero medals, or just one by fluke. Now, they have managed to win three. That is a dramatic improvement, but still pathetic compared even to small, poor countries like Jamaica.

The usual Indian excuses of 'India is poor' or 'Indians are not interested in sports' are pathetic, given how jubilant Indias get at winning a bronze medal, or winning a cricket game against a small country like Sri Lanka.

*****
That is funny isn'nt it .You claim to be on the top of the world but it was China who won the most number of medals. Is there a correlation, no. Olympic games are more subsidized than any other games in the world. Govt. accross the world put hige amount of money to satisfy the ego at the olympics.

We had the best hockey team in 1940's when we beat America 24 - 1 and Nazi Germany 8-0 in front of Hitler. At that time Hockey = India. We do had our golden days and its only now that we are not having enough of them . So why should we cry about everything that is bad.

*****

11) Its hard work of all these 50 years that is bringing so much fruit that our scientists are embarking on ambitious moon mission.

Yes, only 60 years after America did the same.

India's space program has not put a man in space, hence it has not come of age.
*****
But USA did it after USSR and the authenticity of moon travel still needs to be proved
****

12) There is no substantive proof of this .

There is overwhelming proof of this. Look at how many billboards in Indian cities have US brands. Look how many US TV shows Indian children watch. The wheelbarrow and double-wheelbarrow effect are everywhere in India.

*****
Back to square one. Tell me which nationality you are from and then let me tell you more about your past. Are you so scared to reveal it. I may not be very proud of my present but I am of my past and optimisitic of future.

And I do not give ridiculous theories like WB and DWB to justify why did not I like a place.
*****

You are the typical Indian who is in perpetual denial about the massive flaws of Indian culture, and when there is a tiny victory, you inflate the importance of it and become complacent again.

*****
Time and again I have said that no one is perfect and I am pretty sure that you agree with that too. Every society has its flaws and Indian society too. But never I have seen such an attempt to put a single country down and beat it mercilessly. I dont know what maturity you are referring to but constanly ridicule a society is not act of maturity too. Bring some constructive points to the table and talk sense. That way we can have a better discussion. Remember an eye for an eye makes world blind and this was said by an Indian too;)
*****

The first step towards turning India into a middle-income country, and then a developed country, is to look within, and change the flaws of Indian society.

The good news is that India is at least a wheelbarrow culture, and so will follow Taiwan and South Korea to prosperity (except that India is so far behind that it will take 50 years at the present rate).

**
50 years is good enough . I will be happy to see consistent growth rather than explosive growth and then huge slumps. Read some books on stock market 50 years of 8% growth will compound our economy to trillions of Rupees and though I may not be around , will be happy to see this happening

2) We are poor because of a variety of factors and not because of politicians only.

All reasons are tied to culture. Indian culture has too many flaws that prevent progress. Denial of this merely prolongs the poverty.

3) We have established that far more people want to get out of India than get in. Conversely, far more people want to get into the US, Australia, etc. than want to get out. This net difference between inflow and outflow is the true measure of a country's quality. India fares poorly in even retaining its own people, let alone attracting others.

4) India was tricked by China in 1962. Before that it was Hindi Chini Bhai Bhai .

India is always tricked. Whether by Alexander, the British, China in 1962, or the USSR with economic scams. The natural conclusion is that India is very easy to trick and manipulate. Part of this is due to the natural xenophobia and inferiority complex inherent in Indian culture (see point 1). You clearly don't know much about Indian history. Hopefully, I have educated you a bit.

5) We are in agreement that India's present rate of growth will get it to Mexico's presnet level in 30 years (by which time Mexico will have advanced).

In terms of human development, India is ranked #128 out of 170 countries in the world. This is shameful, and is not the fault of any outsiders. Indians seem to be happy to be only better than Pakistan, which is a low goal to aspire for.

6) It was called as Golden Bird of the west and that is when the marauders came in , made deep divisions in our psyche and looted us to destrtoy us.

Only a very weak-minded people would get 'deep divisions in their psyche'. Weak, weak, weak Indian minds.

You still are obsessed with blaming the events of decades and centuries ago. Even though I have taught you that :

India, in 1950 (which is after the British left, by the way) was just as poor as Taiwan and South Korea. Now, those countries are 25 times richer than India per capita.

Yet, stupid Indians keep blaming the British, or say that being a democracy makes Chinese-style growth impossible. This is typical Indian excuse-making, and will continue to ensure India's poverty.

7) Indians always settle for mediocrity. India's tourism industry is pathetic even compared to Thailand and Egypt, yet you are proud of it. India's space program merely uses technology adopted from the US and Russia. Nothing was invented in India.

The Indians who go to Microsoft, etc. are ones who decided that working for a US company is better than being trapped in India, knowing India cannot create such companies. The wheelbarrow effect, again.

8) And how many things US imported from others.

Your Indian ignorance shows. The US invents almost all the primary technologies in the world, and has done so for the last 100 years.

Importing low-cost products made in China is a different thing (but it is yet another endeavor India has failed at).

9) That is funny isn'nt it .You claim to be on the top of the world but it was China who won the most number of medals.

Check your basic facts (which is hard to do from India, but nonetheless..). The US won more total medals than China. China won more golds but a lot less Silver and Bronze.

The point is, India is the WORST country in the world in sports. Prior to 2008, it was surprising to the whole world how a country of 1 billion usually wins zero medals. Even African countries outperform Indians. Even in India's primary sport of cricket, India is routinely beaten by much smaller countries.

India's poor performance in sports is a byproduct of Indian culture (laziness, cowardice, and a lack of discipline).

10) But USA did it after USSR and the authenticity of moon travel still needs to be proved

What needs to be proved? It was done. No serious government in the world disputes this (including rival Russia). Only complete idiots say ignorant things like this.

*************************

Ashvini, I realize that being in India, you don't have access to much information about the outside world (books are rare in India), and are trapped in a culture that is based on massive layers of denial and excuse-making. It will be hard to overcome these barriers. You probably don't have much experience with people who know about the world outside of India.

But that is what has to happen for India to advance. It has to look inwardly, rather than blame the British, or say China has advantages that India doesn't, or that what South Korea and Taiwan did cannot be done by India. All this typical Indian excuse-making leads to a continuation of India's poverty.

The WB and DWB effects are the ray of hope, and that is what has caused slow progress to start. India will still be one of the world's poorest countries 30 years from now, given how far behind it is. But there is hope for the distant future.

First, do not bother using reason and logic to argue against Ashvini's point. Ashvini is a woman, and a universal character trait among women, regardless of the culture in which they were raised, is that they are ruled by their emotions and make emotional arguments. We have been witness to the last set of interactions between you and her, and it is apparent that an educated women like Ashvini is perhaps the dumbest kind.

I suggest you visit http://www.manhood101.com to read a thorough treatise on the irrational nature of women and the oxymoron use of the term "educated or intellectual" woman.

We have all bared witness to just one example of this, with Ashvini's childish name-calling and defense mechanism, when faced with the prospect of countering your well-researched and logical conclusions.

I have one suggestion for an article. In every society where the Islamic population is nearing 30-40% there is increased discord and these countries often become international hot spots of instability. I hypothesize, with several example countries including Nigeria, that as the Islamic population reaches near majority, they don't play nice with their non-Islamic countrymen and impose Sharia Law and Jizya tax on them, by force if necessary. Perhaps you could write a treatise on this phenomenon, and as usual, it would be politically incorrect.

Tron, it is very possible Ashvini is a man. Indian men are very feminine in their nature. They are ruled by their emotions. And take pride in the dislike of reason. It is for this reason, that they are so easy for foreigners to invade and maraud and cheat. Before any of you start questioning my personal credntials, please let me say I'm Indian.

Now GK, brilliant blog.....Brilliant basically means I am on agreement with you on many points.....you see, I'm brilliant. So anyone who agrees with me must be doubly so ;-)

What India really needs is a reset button to erase all the memory. anybody who ever wrote code (software), will see that sometimes it better to just erase the code and start over than to try to debug that piece of code. This does not mean physical destruction of india. It's just that we must consciously try not to think of past events. Don't try to learn from the past, because the past is so muddled that there is an eternal confusion about cause and effect, about randomness and correlation. It's all very confusing. Better not to analyse it or try to learn from it. Just forget the past...lessons and all. Forget the wrongs, real or imagined. forget the glories, riches, whatever. Forget all. Concentrate on the present and future and start re-learning ideas/concepts one by one.

To this, because of my personal leanings I'd like to make one exception. Let's carry with us the practises of Yogasanas, pranayamas, vipassana, meditation techniques concerning observation of the breath, of mental processes, of bodily movements, of physical sensations etc. To me, these are the only precious (my personal belief is priceless) things my land has produced. Since it has produced such things, I will never be ashamed of being Indian. For this alone, I will forever love my land. I will be upset about it's present condition, but never ashamed. Therefore, the meditation/mind science techniques I will preserve out of personal attachment. The rest I will throw away without second thought.

Also, your love of India (and also of America) is apparent from the way you write. I have heard several harsh voices criticise india severely. But I could never shake the feelings that these very people love India with an almost insane passion.

What rubbish, another Macaulayite NRI bitching about India and others, licking the western ass in the process lol... Do you have any explanation for India being a superpower for the last 2000 years and before that?? Wasn't India's culture same at that time?? Maybe you have to be more resonable and not "politically correct" to make suchstupid assertions. Your wheel barrow example is again pure bullshit, 10-15 NRIs cannot do anything to better India, do not pat your own back by giving our growth's credit to NRIs such as yourselves. Do you mean to say that Indian government didn't play any rolein propelling India's growth?? Do you mean to say that Indians who work 24X7 don't deserve a credit for their country's development?? Are you seriously this retarded?? :) ....

Your claim that Nehru who primarily steered India post-independence wasn't able to do so because of his "cultural baggage" is again a very shallow argument and is pretty contradictory to the points you make of the supposed superiority of western culture over others. For your information, GK, Nehru was more westernized than Indianed than most other leaders at that time... so by your logic, having the knowledge of "superior" western culture, he should have turned India into a superpower by 1980s right?? Such a bullshit ....
Infact, your dear westernized Nehru was the most ball less, retarded and confused Indian to ever lead the country, MMS comes a second (and not surprisingly, he is another western educated idiot, and quite surprisingly, he too is quite ball less and inept to get of rid of India's problems).

As far as I have noticed, most of the NRI's in India are quite pathetic in competency and knowledge. Native Indians leave NRI's far behind in intellectual tests and their application in the real world, despite of the NRI having the knowledge of "superior" western culture.... It happens because, western culture is more of a celebratory culture that shouts and moans too much but doesn't get anything done. Although you happily use the Indian culture as a culprit for India's downfall,you don't consider the british intervention and manipulation of Indian society during which Indian education system, economic system, judicial system all came to a screeching halt. Mr. GK, you might want to visit the Indian history again as you might know (considering your slave mentality, I guess not) that our past plays a very important role in shaping our present and the present, our future; and I don't think I have to explain who messed up India's recent past (200 years)....

Your skin whitening ad example is laughable at best, although, it seems it did provide quite an encouragement to white supremacists as can be seen in the comment section.. Most Indians don't think about the same fairness that you talk of when you compare these whiteniing creams to actually "creams that will change your race"... if that was the case then Indians would have also dyed their hairs blonde and red like those of whites don't you think??and they also would have adopted a largely western costume, which , to your disappointment Mr. GK, is still not the case. You and other idiots of Indian origin get an orgy over India's adaption of english language, but it is nothing more than a way of having a better communication in the anglosaxxon world. The amount of english speakers in India is nowhere close to the kind that would validate your bullshit claim of culture. Most Indians still speak Hindi,Marathi, Telegu, Tamil etc in the markets, with their friends, in the school,in their homes etc. I guess, you, the great "amreekan" don't speak any Indian language due to the fear of being seen as belonging to an "inferior"culture... Am I right?? :)

So, in essence, Mr. GK, maybe you should just stick to analyzing American economic trends, appeasing american audiences and ass-licking NRIs who actually buy your bullcrap.
As, it is pretty from this naive post of yours, you suck pretty bad in analyzing other countries, even the one you originate from...

And,yeah, please tone down your ass-licking a little, I am sure no white will call you less of an american if you don't show this overt "patriotism" of your host country..Or am I wrong? :D

People here talk a lot about Alexaner the Great, British Colonials and Genocide in Bangladesh, however we can summarize that Indians suck at war. Why?

One Word Culture(Again)

Recently if found this video from Extra Credits.
Extra Credits is a youtube channel made by a small team of video game developers trying to help young developers entering the business by posting videos

In this Video they elaborate why the Genre of the first-person-shooter in the US and not in Japan, by compare these countries view on the gun and their Culture they built around warfare.

The bottom line is the view of culture of the gun says extremly lot about that culture.

Take the Video Game Heavy Rain for exemple.
Heavy Rain is an Interactive Film Noir Thriller made by the french studio quantic dream.In each of the games Scenes you control one of four characters trying to solve a murder mystery around the abduction of a 10-year old child.The thing is is that the games story goes on even if one or more characters die, there is no revival or checkpoints, just permadeath and if all four kick the bucket its game over and the mystery remains unsolved.GAME OVER.
The characters arent glorified superheros as in american games, but normal and vulnerable as you and me. A single gunshot can end their lives.
As a result, everytime a gun appears it is a situation of inament danger, a serios and leathal Treath,absolut and final.

What does that say about french or european culture.
quite a lot actually.

They way Europeans see the gun, which i can affirm as an Austrian, is as abomination of device.
A tool created to do one thing and one thing only,commiting the uttermost unspeakabel crime imaginable: Taking anohter mans life.Nothing more.
Heavy Rains emphasis on the fragility of life and the absolutness of Death,the novel idea for a video game that death is permanent,that there are no checkpoint from which you can start anew and try again as if nothing happend, and the horrofing Power of the gun of extingushing and ending a story by the simple pull of a trigger reflect the european psychic trauma that were the the two world wars in an interessting facett.
War, in the Post-WWII European Mind set is seen as something terrefying, as pure horror, as Hell on Earth.
Instead of glorifying war europe went into the completly opposite direction detesting war, pretending it does not exist.

Germany, as the initiator of WWII is especially prone to this.

When in america a soldier returns from the front in iraq afghanistan and arrive at the airport at home, the people all stand up and applaud, giving standing ovations.,,Thank you" they say ,,Thank you that you gave your life for our protection, for our freedom, for our way of life. Thank you that you risked death,endured hell,so we can watch our kids grow up safly at Home."

When in Germany a soldier returns from the front i iraq our afghanistan and arrives at the airport at home, the people look away,doing nothing.
They know your coming home from the front.
Thing is, there is no Front.
There is no front because there is no war.
Its called ,,Military Action"
There is no war because we are Germany.
We CANT go to war.

Thats what people think,they just saying out loud.

The only recognition you get for giving your life, risking death and enduring Hell on Earth is that people spitt on you and kick you in the Subway

,,Are you Crazy??" they say. ,,You are a German,you cant go to war, you cant take a gun in your Hand and kill some islamic fundamentalists, thats fascist"

Thats how Europeans see the Gun and build a culture around warfare

So why does India suck at war??

Let me answer with a question: How does Indian Culture see the gun?How does it build culture around warfare?

Let me specify that question: When a gun appears in a bollywood movie, what happens next?

I have never seen a bollywood movie, so could one of you give me an answer?